Ken Paulson: Bloggers enjoy First Amendment protection against libel suits

  A website that castigates others as "evil doers" and "thugs" has exactly the same First Amendment protection as USA TODAY and the New York Times – and that’s a good thing.

  In a landmark decision on Friday, a federal appellate court held for the first time that blogs enjoy the same First Amendment protection from libel suits as traditional news media.

  At issue were the blog posts of Crystal Cox, who accused Bend, Oregon attorney Kevin Padrick and his firm Obsidian Finance Group of misconduct in connection with his role as a trustee in a bankruptcy case. A jury awarded the plaintiffs $2.5 million in damages.

Charles C. Haynes: When students protest abortion, can schools draw the line?

  Students with deep religious convictions are fast turning public schools into the newest battleground over abortion – much to the dismay of beleaguered school officials.

  The most recent controversy involves Annie Zinos, a sixth grade student in Minnesota, who was prohibited by her school from sharing pro-life literature with her classmates. Last week, Annie and her family filed suit against school officials for violating her First Amendment rights.

Ken Paulson: Ten Commandments controversy revisited

  It’s been almost 10 years since the Rutherford County, Tennessee, lost a very expensive lawsuit over the posting of the Ten Commandments in the county courthouse.

  The American Civil Liberties Union sued the commission, contending that the posting was an unconstitutional promotion of religion. U.S. Judge Robert Echols agreed and ordered the Ten Commandments removed in 2004.  It will “stay down,” County Mayor Ernest Burgess said at the time, calling it “the end of the story.”

Charles C. Haynes: Ground Zero Cross: A display is not a shrine

  On March 28, a group of atheists in New York lost round one in their legal battle to keep the “Ground Zero Cross” out of the National September 11 Museum in lower Manhattan.

  Federal Judge Deborah Batts ruled that the object – two steel beams in the shape of a cross that survived the collapse of the World Trade Center on 9/11 – may be displayed in the memorial museum without violating the Establishment clause of the First Amendment. (American Atheists, Inc. v. Port Authority of NY and NJ).

Constitutionality of proposed firearms legislation

  Tragic mass shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, and elsewhere have prompted renewed national interest in the federal regulation of firearms. In January 2013 President Barack Obama publicly announced support for three new legislative measures to regulate firearm ownership and sales:

-Banning certain semiautomatic weapons with military-style features—commonly referred to as “assault weapons”—in addition to high-capacity ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds

-Requiring background checks on all firearms sales, not just those purchased from federally licensed firearms dealers

-Enhancing penalties for trafficking in firearms

Charles C. Haynes: In 2013, escalating battles over claims of conscience

   Let’s start the New Year with a conundrum as old as the Republic:

  When religious convictions clash with secular laws, how far should government go to accommodate religious claims of conscience?

  From Colonial conflicts over the refusal of Quakers to take up arms to the more recent refusal of Jehovah’s Witnesses to salute the flag, American history is replete with robust arguments over the limits of “free exercise of religion” as guaranteed by the First Amendment.

Cameron Smith: The Constitutional collision between the First and Second Amendments

  Since the tragedy of the Newtown shootings, politicians and pundits have argued tirelessly that either the Second Amendment is inviolable or gun ownership should be further restricted to "legitimate" functions and limited inventories.

  But the issue is about far more than guns. Our country is beginning to witness a head-on collision between the exercise of the First and Second Amendments.

Elizabeth Robinson: Business owners denied First Amendment protections

  On November 19th, U.S. District Judge Joe Heaton ruled that Hobby Lobby, the arts and crafts chain, and other for-profit companies must pay for the coverage of contraceptives such as birth control, the “morning-after pill” and the “week-after pill,” regardless of the religious convictions of the owners. In his ruling denying an injunction on certain provisions of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), Judge Heaton said “…the court has not found [that]… for-profit companies such as Hobby Lobby and Mardel have a constitutional right to the free exercise of religion.”

Cameron Smith: A Conservative hoping for change

  As pundits across the country sift through the electoral debris, President Obama’s re-election affords an opportunity for Republican introspection. The recent election demonstrates that American political ideologies, cultural demographics, and even the level of political engagement are transitioning in a way not seen in generations. Conservatives face the challenge of determining how the principles of limited government, individual responsibility, strong families, and free markets can regain a foothold during the change.

  Republicans need to be frank about the election results. Their electorate ran a “moderate” candidate against a President whose largest policy accomplishments have been poorly received during a period of lackluster economic performance. Instead of a Reaganesque sweep, Republicans failed to gain any meaningful traction. In fact they actually lost ground. Arguing that the President did not win as many electoral votes as he did in 2008 is about as useful as finding a silver lining in being beaten by two touchdowns instead of three.

David Azerrad: Constitutionalism: Here are a few things Richard Stengel doesn’t know about

  “Here are a few things the framers did not know about: World War II. DNA. Sexting. Airplanes. The atom. Television. Medicare. Collateralized debt obligations. The germ theory of disease. Miniskirts. The internal combustion engine. Computers. Antibiotics. Lady Gaga.”

  Time managing editor Richard Stengel opens his deeply flawed 5,000-word article on the Constitution with this self-evident chronological platitude. Reading through his piece, it soon appears there are a few things he doesn’t know.